William Wang ParadigmLast changed 11/30 10:42P EDT
Add me to the email chain: firstname.lastname@example.org.
I debated at H. H. Dow High School and I am now debating at the University of Michigan.
I read soft left affs and went for neolib/security Ks.
Thoughts on the topic:
Internal link evidence comparison usually decides alliance DA debates.
Condition CP is very effective.
Contextualize case arguments to the 1AC, because evidence itself is often too vague.
Do evidence comparison beyond "they're wrong because our author disagrees."
"Permutation is intrinsic/severance" requires substantial explanation.
The ideal 2NR/2AR in front of me:
Spend the first ~15 seconds explaining how I should vote.
Turn your argument into a narrative.
I can definitely do fast, but I prefer relatively slow.
These rounds are difficult for everyone involved because it seems like every judge, even the 50/50 ones, have drastically different views on particular arguments.
Overall, I don't have any substantial predispositions on framework, except that I'm sympathetic to arguments about small schools, on both aff and neg.
I have sparse experience with K v K rounds, but I wouldn't feel lost in one.
Clash rounds come down to framework 99% of the time.
Describe to me the threshold for voting aff and neg.
The evidence says whatever you tell me it says.
Don't start with 'the counterplan solves 100% of the aff and avoids the net benefit' and follow up with no explanation.
If your counterplan doesn't 'cheat' then it's probably not good enough.
I do not kick a counterplan for you.
I'm sympathetic to aff theory, especially on counterplans.
Incomprehensible two second theory shells are not voters.